Cannot Quash FIRs Merely On Basis Of Preliminary Enquiry Report: Tamil Nadu Govt To Madras High Court On SP Velumani's Quashing Petition

On the second day of the hearing of former minister SP Velumani's petitions seeking quashing of the two FIRs alleging irregularity in grant of tenders, the State argued that he cannot rely on the preliminary inquiry report to state that he was innocent.

The submission was made by Advocate General R Shunmughasundaram before a division bench of Justice PN Prakash and Justice RMT Teeka Raman. The AG also argued that the court cannot make a decision in the quashing petitions only on the basis of a preliminary report, adding same would set a bad precedent.

If any court decides a matter only based on the preliminary report, it would set a bad precedent. It has never been done. It's only purpose is to verify and register FIR. Not the collection of evidence. Not evidence but mere enquire. Only to satisfy the officer that a cognisable offence has been committed.

He also submitted that the petitioner could not seek quashing of the FIR at this stage stating that they were not given an opportunity of hearing. 

FIR is only a starting point. At this point they cannot come and say that they were not given an opportunity. It is only during the investigation that substantial materials come to light.

On the petitioner's claim that the CAG report only dealt with the execution of the contract and did not deal with the manner of allocation of the contract, the AG submitted that the same was misleading as the auditor report clearly talked about the injudicious award of the contract.

He further submitted that the CAG report speaks of serious inefficiency in the manner of taking estimates which led to the contractors quoting absurdly low prices, leading to an undue advantage to them.

The petitioners Friday submitted that the FIR was general in nature and made no specific allegations against the public servant. Even though it was claimed that property was purchased using funds of the public servant, the details of those properties were not provided.

It was argued that an offence was made out only if the public servant was unable to give satisfactory details of the assets. No case could be registered against a public servant merely because he had some assets, the counsel representing accused argued.

"You cannot register an FIR just because there are assets. You should call for my explanation before registering FIR and if there is no reasonable explanation only then the FIR can be registered," Senior Advocate SV Raju, who represents Velumani, submitted before the court

The hearing in the mater will continue on November 8.

Case Title: Arappor Iyakkam v The Director and others

Case No: WP No. 34845 of 2018